FAQ
08. Extensibly Group Prereqs

Proposal:

Rather than have 'config_requires' and 'install_requires' and
'signature_requires' and 'build_recommends', have a two-level system. This
requires a small bit of reworking now, but is easy to extend later without
adding many top-level keys. Right now (phase)_(verb) is multiplicitive.
Both phases (test, install, configure) and verbs (requires, recommends,
conflicts) can be added easily over time.

Comments:

* I would also like to see this split better. It recently came up that a
'recommends' list is inappropriate to list optional testing modules,
however as a two-level system, 'test' and 'recommends' might be a better
fit, as 'test_recommends' doesn't exist at the moment. (Barbie)

* This proposal assumes that the downstream consumers will be able to
handle all possible combinations. The implications for the downstream are
multiplicative, even if the encoding in META.yml are not.

Search Discussions

  • Ricardo Signes at Oct 9, 2009 at 12:17 pm
    * David Golden [2009-10-09T07:46:01]
    08. Extensibly Group Prereqs
    Agreed. (I proposed it.)

    --
    rjbs
  • Graham Barr at Oct 9, 2009 at 1:36 pm

    On Oct 9, 2009, at 6:46 AM, David Golden wrote:
    08. Extensibly Group Prereqs

    Proposal:

    Rather than have 'config_requires' and 'install_requires' and
    'signature_requires' and 'build_recommends', have a two-level
    system. This
    requires a small bit of reworking now, but is easy to extend later
    without
    adding many top-level keys. Right now (phase)_(verb) is
    multiplicitive.
    Both phases (test, install, configure) and verbs (requires,
    recommends,
    conflicts) can be added easily over time.
    +1

    I think having top level groups for "phase" all having a common
    structure underneath would be very useful

    Graham.
  • David E. Wheeler at Oct 9, 2009 at 5:24 pm

    On Oct 9, 2009, at 6:36 AM, Graham Barr wrote:

    Rather than have 'config_requires' and 'install_requires' and
    'signature_requires' and 'build_recommends', have a two-level
    system. This
    requires a small bit of reworking now, but is easy to extend later
    without
    adding many top-level keys. Right now (phase)_(verb) is
    multiplicitive.
    Both phases (test, install, configure) and verbs (requires,
    recommends,
    conflicts) can be added easily over time.
    +1

    I think having top level groups for "phase" all having a common
    structure underneath would be very useful
    +1

    David
  • David Golden at Oct 9, 2009 at 1:59 pm

    On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:46 AM, David Golden wrote:
    08. Extensibly Group Prereqs

    Proposal:

    Rather than have 'config_requires' and 'install_requires' and
    'signature_requires' and 'build_recommends', have a two-level system.  This
    requires a small bit of reworking now, but is easy to extend later without
    adding many top-level keys.    Right now (phase)_(verb) is multiplicitive.
    Both phases (test, install, configure) and verbs (requires, recommends,
    conflicts) can be added easily over time.
    Agreed. But only if the phases and types are enumerated and well defined.
    * This proposal assumes that the downstream consumers will be able to
    handle all possible combinations. The implications for the downstream are
    multiplicative, even if the encoding in META.yml are not.
    I would like to specify in a "usage" section what is expected of
    downstream parts of the toolchain.

    -- David
  • Hans Dieter Pearcey at Oct 9, 2009 at 2:03 pm

    Excerpts from David Golden's message of Fri Oct 09 09:59:22 -0400 2009:
    I would like to specify in a "usage" section what is expected of
    downstream parts of the toolchain.
    This is probably a good idea for all the proposals.

    hdp.
  • Barbie at Oct 31, 2009 at 4:23 pm

    On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 09:59:22AM -0400, David Golden wrote:
    On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:46 AM, David Golden wrote:
    08. Extensibly Group Prereqs

    Proposal:

    Rather than have 'config_requires' and 'install_requires' and
    'signature_requires' and 'build_recommends', have a two-level system.  This
    requires a small bit of reworking now, but is easy to extend later without
    adding many top-level keys.    Right now (phase)_(verb) is multiplicitive.
    Both phases (test, install, configure) and verbs (requires, recommends,
    conflicts) can be added easily over time.
    Agreed. But only if the phases and types are enumerated and well defined.
    Agreed.
    * This proposal assumes that the downstream consumers will be able to
    handle all possible combinations. The implications for the downstream are
    multiplicative, even if the encoding in META.yml are not.
    I would like to specify in a "usage" section what is expected of
    downstream parts of the toolchain.
    Agreed.

    Cheers,
    Barbie.
    --
    Birmingham Perl Mongers <http://birmingham.pm.org>
    Memoirs Of A Roadie <http://barbie.missbarbell.co.uk>
    CPAN Testers Blog <http://blog.cpantesters.org>
    YAPC Conference Surveys <http://yapc-surveys.org>
  • Steffen Mueller at Oct 9, 2009 at 2:10 pm

    David Golden wrote:
    08. Extensibly Group Prereqs
    +1

    I think this is a necessary (if big) departure from the status quo.

    Steffen

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupcpan-workers @
categoriesperl
postedOct 9, '09 at 11:46a
activeOct 31, '09 at 4:23p
posts8
users7
websitecpan.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase